I know you're in PAL territory, but surely the comparison with Super Mario Bros. 3 still holds?

Or is your opinion of Super Mario 64's gamefeel so low that you consider it an insult to SMB to compare them?

I don't have a wide experience base in terms of classic platformers. I mostly only played top-tier games, and not all of those. I'm not saying either SMB or SM64 had bad controls. I'm just saying that to me it seems like there was an element of "this is the first time we've tried this" in both of them, that got polished out in later games.

Am I the only one who felt F-Zero left more to be desired? It looked like a showcase on how fast the SNES could be, nothing more. (I guess that's what I get for playing it for the first time 15 years after its release.)

Sumez wrote:

I think we must have played two very different SMBs.

Honestly, after trying to replicate the SMB physics for a game engine, I have to agree that it feels a bit stiff. So I started to opt for SMB3 physics instead.

tokumaru wrote:

I also agree that the N64, unlike the PlayStation, can still pull off decent 3D graphics for today's standards, as long as they are stylized instead of realistic.

I don't know what it is about Bomberman 64, but every time I come back to it and see the intro, I'm always fascinated about how aesthetically-pleasing it all looks to this day.

Sumez wrote:

Good games don't age poorly. At least not objectively spoken.

I've never had a PlayStation growing up, but I do now and started playing Metal Gear Solid for the first time (I've seen friends play it back in the '90s), and I absolutely loved it despite its flaws (except one excruciatingly annoying flaw during boss battles I'm sure everyone remembers). I loved this game so much I decided to try to beat it on Extreme. Hell, I'm gonna play some 'a that right now.

I can't concur that graphics of the PSX/N64 era games have aged badly. Some early games, like Crash Bandicoot (1996), already had really solid visual styles, IMO. There are certainly games which seemed to have OK graphics back in the day, but are not that great on further examination (NHL 98 comes to mind from personal experience), but I don't think it's fair to make this into a general rule.

Jedi QuestMaster wrote:

I've never had a PlayStation growing up, but I do now and started playing Metal Gear Solid for the first time (I've seen friends play it back in the '90s), and I absolutely loved it despite its flaws (except one excruciatingly annoying flaw during boss battles I'm sure everyone remembers).

I still think NHL 98 looks good (if you can overlook the "audience"). Anything happening on the ice looks good, at least.

But i'm leaning towards accepting that graphics can age poorly. I mean, they are what they are, and they don't change materially. That goes without saying. But our standards change. If the standard ever where "wow it's so immersive because it's got 3d and you can change perspective and the animation is smooth compared to choppy sprites", that puts even gross graphics in a forgiving light.

But at the time, when friends in school got either ps or n64, i stuck to what i had (nes and gameboy) and moved to pc for the few 3d experiences i enjoyed. I returned to consoles for RE4 and metroid prime, but only after they got cheap in store. I Played Metal Gear Solid for the first time in 2008 maybe, and thought it was pretty ok visually for what it was.

I've never had a PlayStation growing up, but I do now and started playing Metal Gear Solid for the first time (I've seen friends play it back in the '90s), and I absolutely loved it despite its flaws (except one excruciatingly annoying flaw during boss battles I'm sure everyone remembers).

What flaw was that?

Whenever a in-game dialog event is triggered, I can't change weapons. This is especially apparent during the Hind battle after successfully launching a stinger missile at Liquid and not de-equiping the stinger launcher in time. I then have to listen to Liquid's rant while unable to move because I'm still aiming with the stinger.

I've never had a PlayStation growing up, but I do now and started playing Metal Gear Solid for the first time (I've seen friends play it back in the '90s), and I absolutely loved it despite its flaws (except one excruciatingly annoying flaw during boss battles I'm sure everyone remembers).

What flaw was that?

Whenever a in-game dialog event is triggered, I can't change weapons. This is especially apparent during the Hind battle after successfully launching a stinger missile at Liquid and not de-equiping the stinger launcher in time. I then have to listen to Liquid's rant while unable to move because I'm still aiming with the stinger.

Has that ever happened to you?

I can't say that it has. It has been a long time since I played the game though, so could be just that I don't remember it. Or maybe they patched the problem in later revisions (the game got released in Europe 4-5 months later than in the states).

Or is your opinion of Super Mario 64's gamefeel so low that you consider it an insult to SMB to compare them?

I don't have a wide experience base in terms of classic platformers. I mostly only played top-tier games, and not all of those. I'm not saying either SMB or SM64 had bad controls. I'm just saying that to me it seems like there was an element of "this is the first time we've tried this" in both of them, that got polished out in later games.

I'm not sure where SM64 got into the picture, but unlike SMB it definitely has the "it's the first time we're doing this" feel, even if I think it's good enough to not require any major alterations.

Jedi QuestMaster wrote:

Honestly, after trying to replicate the SMB physics for a game engine, I have to agree that it feels a bit stiff. So I started to opt for SMB3 physics instead.

I'm really not sure I understand what your issues with SMB is. I don't think I can think of any other platformers where I feel like I'm as much in control as in the first SMB, even more so than SMB3 though the difference between them is merely a question of habit (SMB3 has that "skip" betwen running at P speed or not, that's a little awkward, but it works perfectly for wha they wanted)In SMB I can run at full speed, immediately adjust my inertia, stop on a dime at any time, and easily handle everything the game throws at me. It is, in fact, amazing how well they got it for a "first attempt" (if stuff like Donkey Kong and Mario Bros. doesn't count).That said, I'm certain there's some reason you have your opinions, so there's probably some thing you could argue could have been better, but "stiff" is definitely not the word you are looking for. Mario is anything but.

I'm really not sure I understand what your issues with SMB is. I don't think I can think of any other platformers where I feel like I'm as much in control as in the first SMB, even more so than SMB3 though the difference between them is merely a question of habit (SMB3 has that "skip" betwen running at P speed or not, that's a little awkward, but it works perfectly for wha they wanted)In SMB I can run at full speed, immediately adjust my inertia, stop on a dime at any time, and easily handle everything the game throws at me. It is, in fact, amazing how well they got it for a "first attempt" (if stuff like Donkey Kong and Mario Bros. doesn't count).That said, I'm certain there's some reason you have your opinions, so there's probably some thing you could argue could have been better, but "stiff" is definitely not the word you are looking for. Mario is anything but.

First go play SMB,then play SMB3,then go play SMB again,then play SMB2(U) as Mario,then hook up your SNES and play SMW,then find your Game Boy and fire up SML2,make sure you still have plenty of battery life, then put in SML1...

wait, where was I going with this? Hold up, I need to go play Wario Land now...

That was the whole point of the post that started this discussion. SMB was just an analogy.

SMB is a bit funny with how it handles acceleration and jumping. As psycopathicteen said, it's harder to steer in mid-air, but it's also harder to judge when you're going fast enough to do a running jump rather than just a pathetic standing hop that'll land you right in the middle of the hole you're trying to clear - the transition seems to be fairly abrupt. Also the jump's arc is a bit bullet-timey at the top.

And before you suggest that I need to git gud, I've been playing SMB for 30 years. I've beaten SMB2/TLL repeatedly. I'm not the problem.

SMB3 just feels way more free and natural to me.

...

Again, I'm not saying SMB is bad. I could criticize (say) Donkey Kong Country's loose, thin gamefeel at least as easily, and that was nearly a decade later (plus they didn't fix it in the sequels). I'm sure I could easily track down and play a game that would make Super Mario Bros. feel like a drink of cool water in the desert. But why would I want to?

Last edited by 93143 on Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum